SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2

From: z0d
Subject: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 16:37:28 +0000
Message-ID: <1120840648.939241.142630@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Hello,


I've just upgraded to SBCL 0.9.2 and getting this error when doing M-x
slime:

; compiling file "/home/z0d/stuff/slime-1.2.1/swank-sbcl.lisp" (written
30 JUN 2005 06:56:51 PM):


debugger invoked on a SB-EXT:PACKAGE-LOCKED-ERROR in thread 3084808320:
  Lock on package SB-C violated when interning DEBUG-SOURCE-INFO.
See also:
  The SBCL Manual, Node "Package Locks"

Type HELP for debugger help, or (SB-EXT:QUIT) to exit from SBCL.

restarts (invokable by number or by possibly-abbreviated name):
  0: [CONTINUE      ] Ignore the package lock.
  1: [IGNORE-ALL    ] Ignore all package locks in the context of this
operation.
  2: [UNLOCK-PACKAGE] Unlock the package.
  3: [ABORT         ] Exit debugger, returning to top level.

(SB-EXT:PACKAGE-LOCK-VIOLATION #<PACKAGE "SB-C">)

Does anyone else have this problem? What can I do to make it work
(apart from CONTINUE)?

*FEATURES*:

:ASDF
:SB-FUTEX
:SB-THREAD
:ANSI-CL
:COMMON-LISP
:SBCL
:UNIX
:SB-DOC
:SB-TEST
:SB-PACKAGE-LOCKS
:SB-UNICODE
:IEEE-FLOATING-POINT
:X86
:ELF
:LINUX
:GENCGC
:STACK-GROWS-DOWNWARD-NOT-UPWARD
:C-STACK-IS-CONTROL-STACK
:STACK-ALLOCATABLE-CLOSURES
:LINKAGE-TABLE
:OS-PROVIDES-DLOPEN


Thanks in advance,
Peter.

Re: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2 Christophe Rhodes
Re: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2 Zak Wilson
- Re: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2 Christophe Rhodes

From: Christophe Rhodes
Subject: Re: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 19:02:38 +0000
Message-ID: <sq4qb5yvch.fsf@cam.ac.uk>

"z0d" <·············@gmail.com> writes:

> I've just upgraded to SBCL 0.9.2 and getting this error when doing M-x
> slime:
>
> ; compiling file "/home/z0d/stuff/slime-1.2.1/swank-sbcl.lisp" (written
> 30 JUN 2005 06:56:51 PM):

There is no reason to expect sbcl 0.9.2 to work with slime 1.2.1.  I
would advise you to try HEAD of slime's CVS.

Christophe

From: Zak Wilson
Subject: Re: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 03:49:50 +0000
Message-ID: <1120880990.611348.43320@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

UNLOCK-PACKAGE tends to solve the problem pretty well.

From: Christophe Rhodes
Subject: Re: SLIME 1.2.1 vs SBCL 0.9.2
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 06:57:54 +0000
Message-ID: <sqmzowxy8d.fsf@cam.ac.uk>

"Zak Wilson" <··········@gmail.com> writes:

> UNLOCK-PACKAGE tends to solve the problem pretty well.

Not if the lock violation is because of a symbol which is no longer
exported because it no longer has any function binding.  The immediate
symptom, yes; the problem, no.

Christophe